Melrose Manufacturing Co. v. Kennedy

Citations

• 59 Fla. 312

Syllabus

<p>1. Grftde turpentine that is collected in boxes cut in pine trees in a condition to be dipped up and used in the manufacture of spirits of turpentine and kindred products, is personal property.</p> <p>2. Where crude turpentine collected in boxes cut in pine trees is the subject of conversion and its ownership is sufficiently alleged, the ownership of the- trees or of the land is immaterial. ...</p> <p>3. Where the refusals to give several requested instructions that contain distinct propositions are excepted to as an entirety, and one of the requested instructions was properly refused, the court will not consider the other requested instructions.</p> <p>4. The statute authorizes charges given to be excepted to in a motion for a new trial, but the refusal to give requested instructions must be excepted to at the time.</p> <p>5. Where the authority under which a defendant claims his rights gives turpentine privileges on lands to January 1, 1908, and timber or saw mill privileges thereon to January 1, 1910, it is not error for the court to charge that the defendant had the timber rights “from January 1, 1910, subject to the plaintiff’s right to turpentine therein from the first day of January, 1908, until such time as timber shall be cut by” the defendant.</p> <p>6. Papers not appearing to refer to the subject of litigation are properly excluded, but documents under which rights in litigation are claimed are properly admitted in evidence.</p> <p>7. Where the trial judge does not certify that the bill of exceptions contains all the evidence adduced at the trial as provided by the rules, the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict cannot be considered by the Supreme Court.</p>